1

MOBILITY FOR ALL: THE RIGHTS PERSPECTIVE

Anjlee Agarwal, Debabrata Chakravarti and Nidhi Madan,
Samarthyam, National Centre for Accessible Environments, New Delhi, India
samarthyamindia@gmail.com

INTRODUCTION
Over the past decade, Delhi‟s public transit infrastructure has grown exponentially to cater to its
burgeoning population. Since the scale of development was unprecedented, the opportunity to
serve the widest demographic possible, including the elderly and disabled, was emphasized. To
create inclusive transit services that could be sustained and replicated across the country,
equitably access for all was considered crucial.
APPROACH
Samarthyam, National Centre for Accessible Environments, a civil society organization in India,
advocated for the incorporation of universal accessibility features in the National Urban
Transport Policy revision in 2014. It continues to collaborate with Government of Delhi and
other public transit agencies to identify mobility challenges and provide innovative solutions for
persons with reduced mobility and disabilities.
Delhi Metro Rail Corporation (DMRC)
DMRC set an example by including the access needs of persons with disabilities (PwDs). Metro
stations include accessible ramps with hand rails; guiding paths and warning strips; bright colour
contrast, large lettering signage and information displays; lift controls at low height with Braille
panels, raised controls and auditory signals; and, resting areas. Platforms are designed for level
boarding into the rail coach, with strategically placed warning tiles and wayfinding signage.
Inside the coaches are designated wheelchair spaces, audio announcements, dynamic displays
and sensory door closing mechanisms. There are designated parking lots for PwDs outside.
Bus Rapid Transit System (BRTS)
Low Floor Buses: To create an accessible bus, Samarthyam in association with Transport
Research & Injury Prevention Programme (TRIPP), Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) Delhi,
worked with the bus manufacturer, TATA Motors, to incorporate wide doors, transit ramps,
designated wheelchair space, public information systems with audio & digital display, colour
contrast handrails and stanchions, and, illuminated destination and route signs.
Bus-Queue-Shelters (BQS)
Samarthyam intervened at the planning stage to emphasize the need for platform-bus interface
for level boarding; BQS with ramps, tactile paving, Braille route and information signage.
Ramps with handrails and configuration of tactile paving were worked out with BRT architects
during the implementation process.
Pedestrian Infrastructure
To provide accessible „last mile connectivity‟ between the transit facilities, and to other services,
Samarthyam revised the pedestrian guidelines and codes of the Indian Roads Congress with
inclusive design standards for pedestrians and commuters.
 2

RESULTS
As the capital, Delhi has set an example for the rest of the country with its inclusive transit
infrastructure with the Delhi Metro, low floor buses and bus-queue-shelters, and pedestrian
facilities. From the inception, accessible features were incorporated in the planning and
implementation of these services, with continued review and adaptation underway.
CONCLUSION
Adoption of universal design in perspective planning of facilities involving both stakeholders
and user groups promotes independent travel, sustainable mobility and makes the trip chain
seamless. The more accessible the urban transit infrastructure, the more it is used. The more it is
used, the greater the societal pressure on the responsible civic agencies to incorporate further
inclusive features. It is also in line with the new Rights of Persons with Disability Act, 2016.

KEYWORDS
obility, Safety, pedestrian friendly, barriers, universal design, disabilities, accessibility

INTRODUCTION
Every individual, including Person with Disabilities (PwDs), has the right to travel and to use
public transportation with dignity and independence. It is a fundamental right of all citizens
regardless of their abilities and disabilities, since travel is usually a daily necessity for education,
employment, medical attention, and entertainment.
Obstacles in existing transportation systems i.e. vehicles, terminals, and operations induce
fatigue, restricteducational and employment opportunities thus causing frustration. It hinders the
right to freedom of movement, equal participation and access to health and other social services.
Samarthyam, National Centre for Accessible Environments, a civil society organization in India,
advocated for the incorporation of universal accessibility features in the National Urban
Transport Policy revision in 2014. It continues to collaborate with Government of Delhi and
other public transit agencies to identify mobility challenges and provide innovative solutions for
persons with reduced mobility and disabilities.The best example is Delhi Metro Rail Corporation
(DMRC), a joint venture of Government of India and Government of National Capital Territory
of Delhi serving Delhi, Gurgaon and Noida of India. The developments and the
initiatives/policies etc. undertaken are keenly followed by the rest of the country.

DELHI METRO RAIL CORPORATION

To its credit, the Delhi Metro from its inception wholeheartedly embraced the need of access for
PwDs. Samarthyam, a civil society organization promoting universal access in the Asia Pacific
region, began advocating for the access needs of PwDs from the early stages of the project.
Samarthyam approached DMRC with the objective of ensuring that the design of all the stations
is in consonance with the diverse access needs of PwDs. It conducted the first Access Audit
(accessibility check) during the under construction Seelampur station (renamed Welcome
station) in March 2002 along with DMRC engineers & architect. The access audit team
comprising people with diverse disabilities and used accessibility checklist and submitted its
suggestions and recommendations supplemented with photographs to DMRC for
implementation.
 3

Sensitization workshops for policymakers and stakeholders were also conducted during this time.

FIGURE 1 Access Audit of Metro FIGURE 2 Workshop for Stakeholders

DMRC welcomes the user group perspective and invited Samarthyam for access audits and
inputs on other metro stations/services from time to time. The media highlighted the cooperation
and coordination between Samarthyam and DMRC for barrier free Delhi Metro, playing a role in
promoting its accessibility. The first stretch of 8.3km with four Coaches and six Stations were
inaugurated on 24th December 2002.

FIGURE 3 Inaugural Delhi Metro ride on 25th December 2002

The DMRC has set an example for Universal and Inclusive Design in India. The built Stations
provide features such as designated parking for PwDs; ramps with hand rails; guiding paths and
warning strips for vision impaired persons; bright colour contrast for low vision persons; large
lettering and information displays and signage; lifts with lowered control panel with Braille and
raised control buttons and auditory signals, wide doors and grip rails on the sidewalls of the
elevator car; resting areas for senior citizens and disabled persons; well-lit corridors; and,
widened ticket gate to accommodate wheelchair users. Inside the coaches, there are designated
spaces for wheelchair users, audio announcement with dynamic display and sensory door closing
mechanisms.
 4

FIGURE 4 Ramp Access to Station FIGURE 5 Colour contrast Signage Overhead

FIGURE 6 Way finding Overhead Signage FIGURE 7 Directional Signage

Also, Metro Sahayaks (or Metro Helpers) are present at stations to provide assistance at all
times. They are invaluable not only for PwDs, but also for senior citizens, new users and others
unfamiliar with the system.
DMRC is committed to making the Metro system accessible in its growth plan and was always
receptive to constructive feedback, regularly conducting access audits at most stations opened
since to make them user-friendly and safe. Samarthyam later provided inputs for further
improvements which included the following: lowering the ticket counter height/single window
facility; distinct sound beeper for orienting vision impaired persons; and transit ramp to bridge
horizontal and vertical gap between the coach and platform. The toilets constructed by a private
agency for PwDs required modifications in its design. Samarthyam forwarded the design of an
accessible toilet to DMRC and the private agency. The Chief Architect, DMRC is following up
on all suggestions.
Impact of Delhi Metro
Examples from the Delhi Metro validate this paradigm shift, represented by the diversity of users
of this public transportation system. It has demonstrated how an accessible system creates safe,
comfortable and equitable infrastructure, not only for PwDs, but also those with reduced
 5

mobility, people with health problems for example respiratory, cardio-vascular, joint problems or
temporary ailments; senior citizens; pregnant women; families with young children and people
with heavy luggage etc.
Accessibility, comfort, safety and time-saving were ranked the main reasons for this shift.
Purpose
To provide and promote accessibility in urban transit systems, an invaluable tool is user
feedback. While interventions for inclusive design have seen specific changes in existing
systems, DMRC was the first system in India to be designed with a holistic approach towards
universal accessibility. This comprehensive planning approach translated into the accessible
trains, stations, services and facilities. Buttressed by its educated and enabling support staff, the
empowerment it provides not just in terms of access but in attitude, acceptance and
understanding highlights the crucial role accessibility can play in society.

FIGURE 8 Widened Ticket Gate FIGURE 9 Designated Space for Wheelchair

Accessible and equitable connectivity that the Delhi Metro provides has shifted the design
paradigm of public transportation infrastructure towards creating accessible systems and
services. As a model system, it is being studied for replication in other cities across India
including Chennai, Hyderabad, Bangalore and Kochi, among others. As a working system, its
challenges and success are being highlighted, the drawbacks and limitations worked upon for
better accessibility. The biggest success is that the rationale for access is no longer required for
public agencies, it is now a given. It is no longer a question of why or how much, but how do we
do it best. This is a measure of the success of the Metro, the impact of advocacy and awareness
and also the promotion and implementation of the UNCRPD.
The DMRC too has been consequently looking to improve shortfalls in accessibility in future
phases of the Delhi Metro, studying the deficiencies and user experiences to create a better
system.

BUS RAPID TRANSIT (BRT) SYSTEMS

BRTsystems have emerged as the primary mode of public transport under consideration. They
are comparatively flexible, easy to adopt, easily upgradable and affordable. In 2002, Government
of National Capital Territory of Delhi (GNCTD) approved BRT on 7 dedicated corridors
totalling 115.5 km, as the answer to Delhi‟s traffic woes. BRT systems not only provide a
 6

dedicated corridor for quicker bus & priority vehicle movement, but also provide a segregated
and safe corridor for pedestrians and non-motorized transport (NMT) like cycles and cycle
rickshaws. This allocates road space on a more equitable basis with people rather than vehicles
as the focus - the weakest and most vulnerable road users have parity with private vehicular
Right of Way users. The system facilitates access to public transport and also
encouragespedestrian trips for short distances.
Towards the prioritization of public transports particularly BRT systems, stakeholders are
required to invest in renewal of transit and road infrastructure. This creates ample opportunities
to make the system inclusive by incorporating Universal Design features. This should include a
full spectrum of inclusive design features, most of which are cost effective when included in new
vehicles. For example, buses should be built to minimize the horizontal and vertical gaps
between the station, platform edge and the bus floor. [Rickert, 2007]
Delhi is a prime example of the multiplicity of advisory, regulating and implementing authorities
responsible for the BRT. Samarthyam partnered with a number of stakeholders and service
providers to identify transportation challenges and solutions for persons with reduced mobility
and disabilities, which affect travel behavior and frequency for this system.
Methodology
Samarthyam approached the Transport Research & Injury Prevention Programme, Indian
Institute of Technology Delhi (TRIPP, IITD), who were engaged as technical and conceptual
advisors to BRT Delhi by the Transport Department, GNCTD. Samarthyam‟s request to be part
of the BRT Delhi project, to highlight concerns of persons with disabilities (PwDs) and to
promote „Mobility for All‟, was welcomed by TRIPP, IITD.
Defining Accessibility
Since 2003, periodic meetings of the working group have been conducted by TRIPP, IITD;
attended by major stakeholders, transport and urban planners, bus manufacturers, architect firm,
opinion makers and other implementing agencies. The meetings offered a platform to all
stakeholders to interact with professionals involved in designing and managing BRT around the
world. Samarthyam has advocated the moral, legal and commercial advantages of having
accessible BRT in all the meetings and forums. These meetings helped keep the focus on
inclusion in planning and design, monitoring compliance with standards and avoiding costly
mistakes. [TRIPP, IITD. 2003]
Important elements of the BRT system such as buses, bus shelters, street and pedestrian
infrastructure were targeted to have Universal Design features, thereby ensuring a seamless
journey from the point of origin to destination.
Low Floor Bus (LFB)
Samarthyam made a presentation on the concept of Universal Design in public transit systems in
December 2005, at “Workshop on BRT System Delhi”, organized by Transport Department,
GNCTD and attended by stake holders and vehicle manufacturers from India. Three international
experts from USA, Austria and Canada presented best practices on BRTS from all over the
world. [TRIPP, IITD. 2005]
Consequently, design and prototype development for high capacity low floor buses were
undertaken by bus manufacturers in India including TATA Motors Limited, Ashok Leyland
 7

Limited and Sutlej Motors Limited. Except TATA Motors, the prototypes of all other
manufacturers were semi low floor buses with steps.
A comparative analysis (Table 1) of the high floor, semi low floor and low floor bus, tilts the
balance in favour of LFB. Moreover, it has been proven in countries already using the BRT that
LFB are more popular among users. Their attractiveness derives from their strategic design and
development intent to enhance the appeal of bus travel as a transport mode, not just to facilitate
access for PwDs but for the entire society. [Agarwal & Sachdeva, 2005]
TABLE 1 Comparative analysis of high floor, semi low floor and low floor bus

Features High Floor Bus Semi Low Floor Low Floor Bus
Floor height 850mm-1050mm 650mm 390mm
Door width 750mm-790mm 1000-1200mm 1200mm-1500mm
Boarding & More time is required More time is required Easy and speedy boarding
alighting and alighting
Accessibility Inaccessible for Inaccessible for wheel Accessible and safe for all
wheel chair and other chair and other mobility users
mobility aid users aid users
Tata Motors Limited supplied 6 prototypes LFB to Delhi Transport Corporation (DTC) for trials
on Delhi roads in November 2005. One of the prototypes LFB was access audited by
Samarthyam and ERC Design, Tata Motors Limited (Fig. 10).

FIGURE 10 Access audit of prototype bus by Samarthyam and ERC Design team
All access features provided by Samarthyamhave now been provided in the first 1100 buses
delivered to DTC. These buses are plying on all Delhi routes. LFB will gradually replace high
chassis buses in DTC‟s fleet. [Sachdeva and Agarwal, 2007]
BUS-QUEUE-SHELTERS (BQS)
BQS is an important component of the BRT. The greatest challenge is to provide platform- bus
interface so as to facilitate level boarding. Samarthyam conducted a preliminary field study along
with TRIPP, IITD to check feasibility of reducing vertical and horizontal gaps during docking by
LFB. It was found that:
 8

 It is possible to synchronize the platform height with LFB floor height to achieve virtually
level access (Fig. 11).

FIGURE 11 LFB floor heights synchronized with the platform height to achieve level access
Hinged manual ramp in the LFB can be deployed to bridge the horizontal gap and the wheelchair
and pram users can easily board/de-board.
 This would help everyone including: persons with reduced mobility like senior citizens,
families with young children, pregnant women, people with temporary ailments, people with
heavy luggage and persons with diverse disabilities.
BQS has been designed taking safety aspects into consideration. Waiting passengers are not
exposed to vehicular traffic. Other features in the BQS such as ramps, tactile paving, Braille
route and information signage were also considered to make it completely accessible.
Samarthyam and S. G. Architects, consultants to BRT Delhi, worked on accessible design
standards (Fig. 12) such as:
 ramps with 1:20 gradient,
 handrails at two heights (for children and adults),
 engineering configuration of tactile paving for persons with vision impairment and
 route signs & information in Braille and digital display system.

FIGURE 12 Accessible design standards at BRT BQS

 9

Pedestrian infrastructure
Transport disadvantaged persons such as persons with reduced mobility and PwDs constitute a
group with the largest, hidden, unsatisfied demand for user friendly public transport systems.
Any BRT system cannot be called completely accessible, if the street and pedestrian
infrastructure along the corridors providing access to and from the BQS is not inclusive.
BRT Delhi has set an example of inclusive design and transit oriented development through
meticulous planning of pedestrian‟s access needs. Following measures were planned and
undertaken during the re-development of entire Right of Way:
 Reconstruction of pedestrian path, service road and medians
 Widening of corridor cross section for eliminating congestion points
 Leveled and continuous footpaths having resting spaces and spaces for hawkers at every
200m
 Continuous tactile pavers along entire 5.8km length for persons with vision impairments
(Fig. 13)
 Raised Table Top for traffic calming and at grade crossing for pedestrians and mobility aid
users
 Bicyclist/ tricyclist tracks and designated parking for auto rickshaws
 Way finding and route information signage in contrast colour and large fonts
 Special white lighting at average 40 lux for footpaths allow the colour contrast of the tactile
pavers to be visible during the day and night
 Crossings and intersections- auditory signals and accessible median refuges

FIGURE 13 Continuous tactile pavers on entire 5.8km BRT corridor

 10

BRT is the most cost effective environmental friendly solution for public transportation in the
Indian context. Offering „Mobility for All‟ in BRT System, is the first big step towards inclusion
and improved quality of life in cities.
BRT Delhi is the result of partnership between the users & stakeholders and people-focused
approach incorporated into transport planning. Adoption of Universal Design in perspective
planning of facilities involving both stakeholders and user groups promotes independent travel
and sustainable mobility, not just to persons with disabilities, but also to trans-generational
passengers.

PEDESTRIAN INFRASTRUCTURE
A comprehensive design approach, implementation, monitoring and consistent communication
on universal accessibility in the street, road and pedestrian environment and access to and use of
public transport infrastructure are essential for all users to optimize their level of independence
and live life with dignity. The link between lack of access and exclusion is obvious. For
example, the right to employment or accessing livelihood opportunities becomes meaningless in
the absence of an accessible, safe and user-friendly walking environment and transit
infrastructure.
To provide accessible „last mile connectivity‟ between the transit facilities, and to other services,
Samarthyam revised the pedestrian guidelines and authored the Universal Accessibility Manual
for Urban Roads and Streets of the Indian Roads Congress.
These guidelines and codes aim to fill the knowledge gap about universal access and act as a
guide for practitioners, city officials and authorities to plan, design pedestrian environment and
sustainable transportation.

CONCLUSION
Today, there is an increased sensitivity and enhanced understanding amongst Government
agencies, private sector, NGOs and other stakeholders of the need for accessible transportation.
Inclusive and Universal Design would result in more passenger inflow, less travel time and
added revenue generation for the service providers. Its reliability, affordability and comfort
would attract people using private modes of transportation. It would also result in increased
education and employment opportunities and the integration of PwDs into mainstream society.
Samarthyam on the basis of its experience believes that it is an equal responsibility of PwDs
(user group) to advocate/articulate the need for accessible public transportation, to the concerned
departments/stakeholders. Cooperation, coordination and constructive approach between the user
groups and the implementing agencies during the policy formulation and execution, is the best
approach in achieving the desired objective of “Mobility for All”.

REFERENCES
1. The Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full
Participation) Act, 1995. Available at:
http://ccdisabilities.nic.in/page.php?s=reg&t=def&p=pwd_act [Accessed June 30, 2012]
2. UNCRPD, 2008. Available at: <http://www.un.org/disabilities/default.asp?id=259> Delhi
Metro Rail, 2012. Available at: http://delhimetrorail.com [Accessed on August 3, 2012]
 11

3. Bhandari, K., Kato, H., Hayashi, Y., 2009. Economic and Equity Evaluation of Delhi
Metro. International Journal of Urban Sciences, 13(2), 187-203.
4. Agarwal A and Sachdeva S. 2005. Research study on promotion of user friendly public
transportation system, bus and bus shelters in Delhi. [Internet]. Available from:
www.samarthyam.org (http://samarthyam.org/research-studies-and-pilot -projects.html),
14 February 2010
5. Hidalgo. D. and Pai. M. 2009. Delhi Bus Corridor: An Evaluation. Study byEMBARQ
[Internet]. Available from: www.cesindia.org
(http://www.cseindia.org/sites/default/files/dario%20bus%20report%20Final.pdf), 14
February 2010
6. NUTP. 2006.National Urban Transport Policy. [Internet]. Available from:
www.urbanindia.nic.in (www.urbanindia.nic.in/programme/ut/TransportPolicy.pdf), 14
February 2010
7. Rickert, T. 2007. Bus Rapid Transit Accessibility Guidelines. [Internet]. Available from:
www.worldbank.org
(http://siteresources.worldbank.org/DISABILITY/Resources/280658-
1172672474385/BusRapidEngRickert.pdf), 14 February 2010
8. Sachdeva S. and Agarwal A. 2007. “Low Floor Bus and Bus Shelter: Mobility for
All”,Proceedings of TRANSED 2007, The 11th International Conference on Mobility and
Transport for Elderly and Disabled Persons (TRANSED), Montreal, Canada, June 18-22,
pp. 205.
9. TRIPP, IID. 2003. Background on the development of BRT. [Internet]. Available from:
www.iitd.ac.in/tripp
(projecthttp://web.iitd.ac.in/~tripp/delhibrts/brts/hcbs/BACKGROUND%20ON%20THE
%20DEVELOPMENT%20OF%20THE%20BRT%20PROJECT.pdf), 14 February 2010
10. TRIPP, IITD. 2005. Proceedings from ‘Workshop on Bus Rapid Transit System, Delhi’.
[Internet]. Available from: www.iitd.ac.in/tripp
(http://web.iitd.ac.in/~tripp/delhibrts/brts/hcbs/hcbs/rightframe.html), 14 February 2010